Re: glibc segfault on "special" long double values is _ok_!?

[Jeremy Linton]

James Youngman wrote:
> On 6/8/07, Nix <address@hidden> wrote:

> > I'd say this behaviour violates the principle of least astonishment, at
> > least. Mind you, avoiding it does seem like it could be expensive: [...]
>
> Maybe.  For the issue-diagnostic-message use case, performance is not
> such an issue.  But I'm sure there are valid use cases where ultimate
> performance is really vital.  Use-cases vary a lot.

	I sort of doubt that anyone who really cares about performance is 
calling printf...